Re: [patch 02/20] make the inode i_mmap_lock a reader/writer lock

On Wed, 19 Dec 2007 10:52:09 -0500
Lee Schermerhorn <[email protected]> wrote:

> I keep these patches up to date for testing.  I don't have conclusive
> evidence whether they alleviate or exacerbate the problem nor by how
> much.  

When the queued locking from Ingo's x86 tree hits mainline,
I suspect that spinlocks may end up behaving a lot nicer.

Should I drop the rwlock patches from my tree for now and
focus on just the page reclaim stuff?

-- 
All Rights Reversed
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

---

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: [patch 02/20] make the inode i_mmap_lock a reader/writer lock
    • From: Lee Schermerhorn <[email protected]>

• References:
  • [patch 00/20] VM pageout scalability improvements
    • From: Rik van Riel <[email protected]>
  • [patch 02/20] make the inode i_mmap_lock a reader/writer lock
    • From: Rik van Riel <[email protected]>
  • Re: [patch 02/20] make the inode i_mmap_lock a reader/writer lock
    • From: Nick Piggin <[email protected]>
  • Re: [patch 02/20] make the inode i_mmap_lock a reader/writer lock
    • From: Lee Schermerhorn <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: a problem with NETPOLL/KGDBoE
• Next by Date: Re: No dma_sync_* during pci_probe? (Sparc, post 2.6.22 regression)
• Previous by thread: Re: [patch 02/20] make the inode i_mmap_lock a reader/writer lock
• Next by thread: Re: [patch 02/20] make the inode i_mmap_lock a reader/writer lock
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]